Of course, as long as there are morons who think Pakistan is an ally, none of this is going to happen.

Which includes all Muslim fanatics.

One of them being their top nuke thief A. Q. Khan.

We should trust the Pakis about as far as their intelligence services have been penetrated.

Otherwise, they are a new problem: the nuclear-armed semi-basket case.

The transparency of their half-hearted fight against (not-sponsored-by-them) terrorism is indicative of their general brand of Islamo-schizophrenia in this War.

When the survival of the power-holders is threatened by radical Mohammedan maniacs, they will purge their homegrown extremists.

But their own version of the same crippling ideology remains, poisoning all possibilities.

Their more pragmatic strongmen in such murky chaos need to be encouraged to control their god-intoxicated homicidal fools.

Or be warned: we will control them all.

Into a nice, non-discriminating dirt nap.

Has Pakistan gotten serious about terrorism?

It’ll all work, when if the Pakistanis decide to take no prisoners, and go hard after Osama bin Laden.

Wherever they are met they lose…we must kill, kill, kill until they have no one left or people get the picture.
tomas on June 29, 2008 at 9:59 AM

.
Well said, tomas.
.
Given the babblings of the latest incarnation of Baghdad Bob, they are slow learners.

Yet Musharraf described the deal as an “achievement” for Pakistan and a “model” for Afghanistan to follow (Daily Times, September 8). A day after the deal was inked, he flew to Kabul on September 6-7 where he pressed Afghan President Hamid Karzai to consider a similar agreement with the Afghan Taliban. He assured Karzai that the deal he signed with the Taliban would end “Taliban activity on our side of the border or across the border in Afghanistan” (Daily Times, September 8).

Pakistan signs peace deal with pro-Taliban militants

In a move that some say appears ‘a total capitulation‘ to pro-Taliban forces, Pakistan signed a peace deal with tribal leaders in the North Waziristan region of Pakistan Tuesday, and is withdrawing military forces in exchange for promises that militant tribal groups there will not engage in terrorist activities.

Again, Ed we must be reading newspapers from different ‘Earths’. . . or at least different Pakistans. I don’t understand where you get the idea that Musharraf wasn’t for ‘total capitulation’ with this group of people. Musharraf’s position in September of 2006 was to leave them alone. This position of ‘confrontation’ is in stark opposition to Musharraf’s position.

Again, I think it is just an act so that they continue to get US dollars to build up their military so they can fight against India (not the Taliban). But to imply AGAIN that Musharraf’s position is confrontation is revisionist history.

I appreciate your posts on Pakistan, but your understanding of Musharraf’s role there is missing something. I guess you believed the same thing that the US military believed when they gave Musharraf 6 billion unaccounted for dollars for their military. Pakistan, nor Musharraf have EVER done anything positive for the USA.

If PAK wants to get serious then they need to seal the back door while NATO kicks in the front one. Bar that their home guard style military hasn’t a chance in hell of knocking AQ, the Taliban, or their own grandmothers in the dirt.

Don’t like the sound of that.

Maybe he had to let the people see that for themselves before he could act. – Big Dog

Hope you’re right, Biggie.

tribal paramilitary force

What exactly does this mean? This isn’t the Paki army.

Did the Taliban/AQ supporters take down one flag and run up another? Its the tribal paramilitary forces that are concealing the Taliban and AQ, since they operate in the former’s territory…

As Thom Friedman said, the good thing about extremists is, they don’t know when to stop.

I wonder if Friedman was including environmentalists when he said that.

For today, Gilani appears ready to revert back to at least the Pervez Musharraf position.

I think you are missing a “doesn’t” in front of “appear”.

Announced their presence and watched the ‘enemy’ escape out the back?

Yup.

“met no resistance”

So somebody gave the ‘enemy’ the heads up and left the back door open.

Hopefully, Gilani learned his lesson quickly on appeasement, having allowed Peshawar to teeter on the brink of Taliban takeover before acting.

Maybe that was his strategy all along. Maybe he needed to first extend his hand and show the country it would not work. As Thom Friedman said, the good thing about extremists is, they don’t know when to stop. Maybe he had to let the people see that for themselves before he could act. Not so different from what happened in Iraq. People on both sides of the divide had to suffer a little under the extremists to wake up.

Lets hope not. I would be surprised however if the Pakistani government consistantly goes after the Taliban.